Strangelove wrote:Bright side: If a lockout happens we would have a few more months to talk about ridiculous trade proposals!

And for Kesler to get healthy, no chance of coming back early.

The Owners' proposal is absurd, but of course the opening round, so they go for a big xmas present. This is a shame. Bettman has no problem announcing that there were record revenues, but now the league needs to gouge the players. The Minnesota owner signs two huge contracts but then says the system must change, douchebag. Big issue Fehr will have is finding the money for hockey revenue; oh to be a forensic accountant, you could pile up the billable hours on this one. Owners are hiding it under every mattress...

....these sports collective bargaining conflicts are never fundamentally about owner v. player they are about one faction of owners v another faction of owners. Here it's the NYR, Van, Tor, etc v. Minny, Nash, TB, Car etc. This is being done for the bottom feeders...it's going to be a bumpy ride.

My prediction. The season starts with the Winter Classic; it's too big a draw now to miss it. And then we'll do like in '95, 50 game schedule etc.

Larry Brooks (@NYP_Brooksie)
2012-07-13 8:13 PM
Post has learned proposal would eliminate signing bonuses and mandate same salary in each season with 5-yr term limit

I'm sure the players are enamoured.

As a Canucks fan I would hate that deal.

Free agency would no longer be a relevant factor as the players would all be 30+ and the pool would be tiny.

The only way to win would be drafting and development which means long stretches of re-building.

Oh and the Oilers will be able to keep all their kids for 10 years, how much would that suck ?

I'm just dreading the fact we have to hear about all this crap for the next couple of months, and maybe longer. I hate labour disputes like this and the rhetoric that goes back and forth, especially with a little troll like Bettman as the mouthpiece.

The one thing we all have to remember though, is that Bettman's two biggest supporters, and coincidentally the two owners who negotiate his own contract, are Craig Leipold in Minny and Jeremy Jacobs in Boston. These two also own the two teams with the highest payrolls in the league at the moment. You know for a fact Bettman is going to be doing everything he can to get a rollback in salaries given that fact.

Diehard1 wrote:
The one thing we all have to remember though, is that Bettman's two biggest supporters, and coincidentally the two owners who negotiate his own contract, are Craig Leipold in Minny and Jeremy Jacobs in Boston. These two also own the two teams with the highest payrolls in the league at the moment. You know for a fact Bettman is going to be doing everything he can to get a rollback in salaries given that fact.

They don't actually have to roll back salaries.

If they leave the cap where it is but reduce the percentage the players are to receive, the difference is made up via escrow.

The NHL proposal looks like it will certainly stir up things with the PA. But frankly there are no costs to either side at this moment and there won't be any costs until October so there's no pressure, time to throw out wild ideas ... and they have !

I listened to Linden address this a month ago and as he pointed out most of the US owners loose money in the fall period when there's a conflict with the NFL and so he expressed the thought that he believed there would be a shut down delaying the season start.

Frankly like the US owners that's OK with me, softens the season ticket costs

It's interesting to note that the proposal seems to be geared towards the have-not teams. Also, what's missing from this, that has been mentioned in the past, is anything to help facilitate trading bad contracts (I believe Burke was one of the proponents of this). I won't be surprised if some sort of proposal comes from the players side in relation to this.

The five year contract limits, eliminating signing bonuses, and mandating the same salary in each season really handcuffs GMs in general in what they can do.

Under this deal, when the player hits UFA, he's likely going to enter a very shallow free agent pool. I have to think this would encourage even more out of control UFA contracts.

On the plus side, at least the contracts are still guaranteed, the NHL proposal could be worst.

1 - Eliminate guaranteed contracts for players with UFA eligibility but retain it for for players eligible for RFA status. For player contracts the straddle the RFA/UFA date, the date they would gain UFA status, the guarantee on the contract is also eliminated. Reason being, RFA status allows a team hold a players rights while he develops and players develop at different rates. By retaining the negotiating rights, teams are allowed to reap the benefits of their player development. In exchange for the loss of free market negotiating, the player gets his money guaranteed. UFA's are allowed to explore the free market, part of that free market should mean no salary guarantee. Teams should be able to cut players that do not work out, can not resign with team except within narrow window 2 weeks after the start of free agency. Let someone else work the reclamation project at a newly negotiated salary. The Redden's and Souray's are an embarrassment to the players and the owners that can be eliminated. Let the PA or individual players look after their own disability insurance if an injury means the player is cut. EDIT: salary cap hit for a player cut remains in place until season's end.

2 - No signing bonus money for ECL, RFA and UFA. Again, get rid of guaranteed money as much as possible.

No one should be surprised by this news. The league was going to go to the extreme on their first proposal in order to set the one extreme of the negotiating parameters. No one expects them to go any further than that on a broad spectrum. Interesting to see them identify the key fronts for negotiation. Will be just as interesting to see which side compromises on what front and how much.

That said, it doesn't look encouraging ihn terms of seeing regular season hockey in October. I'm thinking we'll see a new CBA and resumption of the season as a Christmas present from the powers that be.

On a side note, wouldn't it make more sense for training camps in August and the season starting in September vice starting later and having the playoffs in end in June? Just sayin...

porp wrote:Unions aren't only about pay. Unions also provide leverage to ensure that the working environment is safe for the workers.

Unfortunately, the NHLPA has failed spectacularly in this regard; re: lobbying for more consistent and stringent refereeing to crack down on cheap shots, head shots, and intents to injure (even if "wearing down" an opponent, wacking and hacking at injuries or creating minor injuries).

I think a player's union is a necessity, no matter how much they get paid. Ask some of the guys who played before the PA came along what life was like.

That said, I prefer collaborative business-labour approaches (like what they have in Germany) vice the Bob Goodenow/Cape Breton Coal Miner school of militant confrontationalism. Here's hoping both sides approach this as partners instead of enemies.

Porp's point is part of the key to the league's success going forward: more inclusion and collaboration on matters of mutual interest and domain. Player safety, rule changes, consistency and rationale in suspensions - these are all things in which the players have just as much stake as the owners and GMs. Two problems: Bettman hates letting the PA have a say in anything and will say no to any further inclusion outright; and the players have to achieve some coherency in what they want on those fronts. Easy to say 'protect the players' until one of their own gets a 35-game suspension. Feher has to herd the cats if they want to achieve anything meaningful in those areas, let alone escrow and salary cap.

Imagine a CBA where rule changes were a true collaborative effort; refs were clearly instructed at the beginning of the season and then left to a 3rd party for performance scrutiny and sanctions; and a mutually agreed-upon arbitrator rule on suspensions and fines. I wonder what the product on the ice would look like. I think I'd like it a lot better than what we're seeing now.

Agreed. And a union done right is a thing of beauty. I mean, if it weren't for the strong unions in Sweden, that organises more than 80% of the workforce, I doubt I'd have 35 paid vacation days and unlimited sick days.

If it weren't for unions you wouldn't have the weekend. Or overtime, or health and safety rules, rules against child labour, and pretty much every other right and benefit you have as a worker. And, might I point out that it makes little sense to me to be disappointed in the millionaire players who actually provide the product and not with the billionaire owners trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of everyone.

I also would have to say I whole-heartedly agree with the suggestion that supplementary discipline should be the work of a third-party panel and referees should be held to a higher standard.

Callicles wrote: If it weren't for unions you wouldn't have the weekend. Or overtime, or health and safety rules, rules against child labour, and pretty much every other right and benefit you have as a worker. And, might I point out that it makes little sense to me to be disappointed in the millionaire players who actually provide the product and not with the billionaire owners trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of everyone.

I also would have to say I whole-heartedly agree with the suggestion that supplementary discipline should be the work of a third-party panel and referees should be held to a higher standard.

Whoa, easy there Mr. Shop Steward!

Totaly agree with the principle of the existence of unions and all, but it's a matter of approach. Trust me, I'm no more enamoured with the league's propposal than anybody in the 'PA but I understand their position in terms of giving themselves a position from which to negotiate. No shilling for the owners here.

Frankly, they look more like asses than anything else with this proposal going public. Fehr has gone out saying the status quo - which the league imposed when the players' union finally caved - is okay as an interim measure and would be happy to see another season of the same if another CBA can't be reached. The league looks like a bunch of screw-tightening arses with this proposal. It's what gets agreed to in the end that matters in the end, but the court of public opinion can't be disregarded and right now the PA and the league are painting the league as a bunch of juice-assed schmoes.